Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
hankg

Sign a petition for menu selectable lens profiles

Recommended Posts

Guest sirvine

Wilson is right. To cite another overused analogy, I am one of the most fanatical Apple brand loyalists alive, and have been since the days of Apple II, but I've recently drifted away from buying Apple stuff because their AppleCare program treats me like a nuisance when I try to get hardware problems fixed under warranty. Are they losing real sales? Yes...I'm the guy who has bought more than ten iPods, and would easily buy an Airport Express on a whim just to stream music to the bathroom and rationalize it as support for a company that I love.

 

On the other hand, as an Apple fanatic, I was trained to hate IBM during the eighties. Imagine my surprise when I bought a refurbished IBM CRT that went on the fritz and, upon calling IBM's helpline, I was taken through an exhaustive over-the-phone troubleshooting session by a competent and helpful customer care rep. After nearly an hour of phone support (on a refurb unit, mind you), he finally asked for my serial number, saw it was under warranty, and shipped out a new one to me that very same minute. That's the kind of stuff that not only builds brand loyalty, but steals it right out from the other guys.

 

Or take Meile as another example. When my new washer/dryer wouldn't turn on after installation, they sent someone out the same week. He spent five minutes looking it over, found that the problem was behind the wall in the plug assembly that my installer had used. He got directly onto the phone to my installer, and drew up a detailed fix on a peice of paper. No charge for his time, even though he was technically entitled to do so.

 

In my experience, Leica does a damn nice job of developing and supporting its products, and does better than most companies to interface with its global customer base. I offer these examples as only illustrative of my general attitude about the right way to run a business. Sometimes you've got to ship the replacement first, or waive the charge for an on-site visit, because you'll get the money back with interest later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guy and Sean have tried until they are blue (well cyan maybe) in the face to get Leica to understand that a large proportion of its currently loyal customer base will feel short-changed if manual lens coding is not included in a future firmware update.

Wilson

 

Wilson,

to be fair, so far I have only been trying to persuade this forum. However as soon as I am back in Germany I have to take my M8 and one of my lenses to Solms for 'correction'

Rest assured I will engage in a robust exchange of opinions with the staff....

 

Francisco,

sorry to hear about your power problem. Nothing to do with the M8 battery I hope!?

Guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Walt,

Not quite sure I understand what you are asking about here. As an example, I have two different 50mm lenses. One is a Leica 50/1.0 Noctilux that is coded, and the other is a CV 50/1.5 Nokton that I have not been able to get as successful coding onto myself.

LJ

 

Hi LJ,

 

You've probably seen the review of 50 mm lenses but I wouldn't both coding the Nokton 50. It really doesn't need the coding, with or without the IR cut filter. Mine is not coded.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi LJ,

 

You've probably seen the review of 50 mm lenses but I wouldn't both coding the Nokton 50. It really doesn't need the coding, with or without the IR cut filter. Mine is not coded.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

 

 

Sean,

Absolutely. It was a bit of a confirmation about the Nokton, and hence my desire to keep it in my kit. Great lens.

 

My point was about having access to any of the color corrections for UV/IR filter use that is extended to Leica coded lenses. I realize that the 50 on up group do not much matter with respect to vignetting, but being able to use a color corrected profile for something like a JPEG file straight from the camera would be nice. (Personally, I only shoot RAW/DNG and do whatever I need to do, but I am thinking about this on a broader scale.)

 

Does anybody have any more concrete knowledge about just leaving the present menu set for coded + UV/IR Filter and not worrying about whether the lens is actually coded or not? Does the in-camera Leica color profile stay turned on for non-coded lenses that have the UV/IR filter on? I need to test this myself, but most of my shooting lately has been under challenging light, and it is a bit hard to tell if there is any effective change.

 

For other lenses, such as the CV 15 and CV 35/1.2, having the camera see the lens as some Leica equivalent has made a considerable differnce in the image quality, and I love it, especailly for the CV 15 to be handled like a WATE.

 

LJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wilson,

to be fair, so far I have only been trying to persuade this forum. However as soon as I am back in Germany I have to take my M8 and one of my lenses to Solms for 'correction'

Rest assured I will engage in a robust exchange of opinions with the staff....

 

Francisco,

sorry to hear about your power problem. Nothing to do with the M8 battery I hope!?

Guy

 

 

Guy,

 

I must, first of all, point out several facts.

 

1- My (M8) batteries work fine.

2- I’m fully aware that I’m the only one, may be, that defends the close system.

3- I’m simply not so fluent like many of you in English so I’ve a handicap.

4- All of us could expend, at least months, talking about how, when and which policies could a small Company try to survive and grow. It’s an endless debate not to be done in this Forum.

5- As in many topics, probably there is not one solution, but a lot.

 

Now, as Guy Mancuso very well says and can be applied in this event

 

"It's not always about what the client will accept but about what you want to deliver to your client."

 

Leica, before IR issue appeared, launched the M8 with a code system for the Leica lenses mainly for solving the vignette and other issues, may be also with unknown possibilities. Always thinking to produce a full system to preserve and, if possible increase, the quality of the images as always has done.

 

The Leica M production has an specific personality, among others with several well defined features: not full automatisms, RF viewing and focusing, available light photography and a high quality and priced lenses always compatible with the future models of priced cameras and assigned to a segment of the market including a lot of more or less crazy amateurs and some of the professional photographers, not many in both cases. (I think the company it’s not prepared for too many customers, some of you are strongly complaining about how slowly Leica works). This has being the Leica portrait for years.

 

Now, LET US REBUILD LEICA HOUSE AND MAKE RICH, VERY VERY RICH LEICA SHAREHOLDERS.

 

According this Forum member’s advices Leica should take the following policies:

 

1- Increase the M8 bodies production till thousands and thousands units.

2- Reduce till only dozens the production of their lenses (only for several crazy rich amateurs and some privileged pros).

3- Provide the M8 body with the following features

- Capability to work 8,10,12,…16 bits.

- Menu to make suitable code advantages for Voigt. Lenses, Zeiss lenses, X lenses y Y lenses, only for the 15 to less than 50 mm.

- Menu to fit the alternatives of several workflows, according to the necessities of wedding, industrial, portrait, architectural, … jobs.

4- Produce a complete set of adapters for the most of the several makes of lenses to connect with the rangefinder and with the needed tolerances.

5- Make the menus with elastic software, able to self-adapt to the users ideas.

6- Forget all the efforts done to preserve Leica quality (camera lens) and do more affordable to buy both with a moderate price.

7- (Please put your own requests….).

8- …………………………..

9- …………………………..

 

May be I’ve done some funny….?, but I’ve red with more or less emphasis the whole of examples I’ve written in the Forum.

 

NOBODY LIKE LEICA CAN SAVE LEICA, neither pros nor amateur. And I think all of us are interested in the future of Leica.

 

Seriously talking, I believe all the members of this Forum can contribute to the Leica development with our ideas and approaching the street to the Company. But it seems to me the members are not allowed to establish a pseudo-democracy of owners asking Leica for…. I beg the moderators to soften this type of polls I’m positive are not representative of the whole world of the Leica customers and followers.

 

Thank you Guy for your patience,

 

Francisco

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been debating this one back and forth for a while. I own a small technology company and know how many users ask for this or that, and each request on it's own (especially from the user's point of view) is probably no big deal to do, but when you add them all up, they are quite a lot of work, would require massive testing time, AND would require massive ongoing maintenence. Everything that Leica adds to the M8 will delay future firmware releases, not just once, but every time there is a new release, because all features have to be tested again to make nothing in the 'new changes' caused enexpected problems in the previous feature set.

 

If Leica introduced a menu system, how long would it be before people ask 'Could you just add this one extra focal length', or 'could you just tweak this one a little' etc. In each case the user has a very narrow perception of how much work that would entail, with almost no idea how it effects other things.

 

If the menu was there, would I use it? Hmmm... possibly for c/v15, but what advantage was that to Leica? I have hand coded all my other lenses, because I am not sure I want to be without any of them for 4 weeks for them to be officially coded by Leica (which would of course be my preference). In addition, the ones that are not officially coded but used a lot (like 28/2.8), I will probably update to newer coded models over the next couple of years anyway.

 

So, I applaud the way that Leica users are trying to help Leica improve their products, and enhance the customer's experience, but in the end, Leica is a company, not a democracy, and while they will undoubtedly take many of our suggestions and implement them (or some version of them), we can't expect them to do everything we ask. Every decision they make has to be on the basis a sound business strategy going forward, and not a nostalgic one looking back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I, obviously agree with you. As small company owner you probably know how difficult is to fight with monsters of the country or of the world. It's necessary to create a bussines personality, to move with agility and keep the loyal costumers and a very clever mind..

 

Go on, David.

 

Francisco.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2- I’m fully aware that I’m the only one, may be, that defends the close system.

 

But it seems to me the members are not allowed to establish a pseudo-democracy

Leica itself has not suggested that anything that they have done was with the intention of closing the system. The company was nearly driven to extinction as it became more a producer of objects for collectors and status accessories for the exclusive luxury market. That road allready led the company to insolvency. Thank god, the Hermes mentality is out the door and the new management seems determined to remake Leica into a company that once again makes tools for photographers. I think they understand that the entry into the RF market by VC and Zeiss was a big net plus for Leica as it expanded the market and brought in a new younger generation of users that could replenish the aging ranks of Leica's customer base. This has given them a much bigger and potentially more lucrative playing field.

 

As far as the usefullness of user feedback -it was users who quickly discovered all the problems that went unnoticed in the companies internal testing. Of course along with useful feedback will come suggestions that are nonsensical and impractical. Leica's management will make decisions that it deems are in the companies, shareholders and customers best interest. They will, as do all effective managers, pay close attention to users experience and feedback. To provide constructive feedback on how to deal with a defect (or if you prefer a technical limitation) in the product which Leica is working hard to provide working solutions for is the purpose of this petition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...let us rebuild Leica house and make rich, very very rich leica shareholders...

Good idea indeed but to earn some money Leica must sell their stuff don't they.

But sell their stuff to whom?

I mean, what will consumers do if they cannot use their CV, Zeiss or Russian lenses with Leica bodies anymore because of cyan shift and other color casts due to the IR story?

Are they supposed to buy 2 or 3 new Leica lenses?

Or buy second-hand Leica lenses, send them in to Solms, wait a couple of months and pay 200/250$ per lens for coding and IR filtering plus i don't know how much to get them adjusted to the M8 rangefinder if need be?

With what money folks?

Isn't the M8 expensive enough yet?

Or perhaps Leica think that their stuff is reserved to rich and famous customers?

Wouldn't like to be young or less wealthy if that is what Leica's preparing mates...

/applications/core/interface/imageproxy/imageproxy.php?img=http://tinyurl.com/rv7w/doute02.gif&key=29ffebb32acac0ffb231850fdb1e808a13b17069547cd61f68c13ebf2a42c630">

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or buy second-hand Leica lenses, send them in to Solms, wait a couple of months and pay 200/250$ per lens for coding and IR filtering plus i don't know how much to get them adjusted to the M8 rangefinder if need be?

/applications/core/interface/imageproxy/imageproxy.php?img=http://tinyurl.com/rv7w/doute02.gif&key=29ffebb32acac0ffb231850fdb1e808a13b17069547cd61f68c13ebf2a42c630">

Let's not forget that! $125 for coding plus $100 for the filter for each lens. Add to that I and many other users could not afford to be delivering lousy color (or could not accept inferior results for ourselves from a $5k camera) and could not wait 6 months for our Leica filters so have had to purchase on our own B+W filters. So the "free" filters are turning out not to be without cost after all.

 

A $225 tax on each lens plus a month without the lens for lenses that even used are the most expensive in the 35mm format? A company needs to be careful as to how many barriers it forces its customers to surmont to do business with it. I think anything Leica can do to soften the blow it should do without delay.

 

As it stands I am going to wind up with a 100% Leica kit (21-28-50-135) and I plan to code all of the still uncoded lenses when my schedule allows it. The 50 and 135 more for convenience so I can leave the menu set. But with the current wait times for coding that might be months from now before I can loose the use of the lens for as little time as possible. It sucks that I can't access the profiles for my lenses which are all supported in the meantime. So for me personally it will be a non-issue eventually but as I have a lot invested in this platform and I really love using it I want to see it survive and thrive.

 

If Leica doesn't want to change this in camera then it should offer an alternative. Like putting the profiles in a Photoshop or C1 plug-in. This way image quality is preserved and it becomes an optional matter of convinience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Good idea indeed but to earn some money Leica must sell their stuff don't they.

But sell their stuff to whom?

I mean, what will consumers do if they cannot use their CV, Zeiss or Russian lenses with Leica bodies anymore because of cyan shift and other color casts due to the IR story?

Are they supposed to buy 2 or 3 new Leica lenses?

Or buy second-hand Leica lenses, send them in to Solms, wait a couple of months and pay 200/250$ per lens for coding and IR filtering plus i don't know how much to get them adjusted to the M8 rangefinder if need be?

With what money folks?

Isn't the M8 expensive enough yet?

Or perhaps Leica think that their stuff is reserved to rich and famous customers?

Wouldn't like to be young or less wealthy if that is what Leica's preparing mates...

/applications/core/interface/imageproxy/imageproxy.php?img=http://tinyurl.com/rv7w/doute02.gif&key=29ffebb32acac0ffb231850fdb1e808a13b17069547cd61f68c13ebf2a42c630">

 

I agree with the spirit of what you're saying, LCT. The M8 is an expensive camera (and justifiably so) but, as I've been arguing for months now, I would like to see the camera be accessible to as wide a range of photographers as possible. I'll leave my comment at that since I've covered this ground many time before.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Folks,

If you download and install firmware 1.02, which is now available, you will see that there is a menu system in place for the WATE lens. The menus allow one to select the focal length they are using with the WATE (16-18-21), to obtain the proper correction for vignetting and for use of the UV/IR filter.

 

So, it would be reasonable to say that such a menu system is possible, is now in place for a specific lens that happens to cover 3 of the 10 Leica focal legths, and could be (that is the caveat), could be built out to accommodate the other focal lengths.

 

Just worth considering at this point. Leica is addressing the issues. They also appear to be listening to some/many of the suggestions being offered by users and testers. This is all good news. Let's hope this sort of progress continues, as it is not only in a great direction, but also proving some of the concepts and suggestions.

 

Just my thoughts here.

 

LJ

 

P.S. This still requires a lens to have a coding scheme that is recognized by Leica. In the case of the CV 15/4.5, one needs to have it coded like a WATE, and then they get the option to select which focal length they want to use (16 being the closest). The final step that I think would be helpful from Leica is to allow non-coded lenses to access this sort of menu system for at least the UV/IR color corrections.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, there is a difference between what a person wants and what the optimum solution may be. Lens profiles should incorporate more than the current adjustments, you could also include distortion correction and all kind of filters or layers and implement it in the postprocessing software. I am not a friend of 1000 in camera options, although I agrree, it would be somewhat tedious to write down all the time what lens was taken for a particular shot - try a voice tag - what focus distance (I complained to Leica about that, and they did not really get it - the RF camera is a nice distance meter, but we never get to see the distance information in the exif), seriously now, you can design your own lens specific profiles already in photoshop and other software. To me the better solution would be an implementation in the postprocessing software. No reason to put your 15 mm Distagon to the side, calibrate photoshop layers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, there is a difference between what a person wants and what the optimum solution may be. Lens profiles should incorporate more than the current adjustments, you could also include distortion correction and all kind of filters or layers and implement it in the postprocessing software. I am not a friend of 1000 in camera options, although I agrree, it would be somewhat tedious to write down all the time what lens was taken for a particular shot - try a voice tag - what focus distance (I complained to Leica about that, and they did not really get it - the RF camera is a nice distance meter, but we never get to see the distance information in the exif), seriously now, you can design your own lens specific profiles already in photoshop and other software. To me the better solution would be an implementation in the postprocessing software. No reason to put your 15 mm Distagon to the side, calibrate photoshop layers.

 

 

Zapp,

I agree with what you are saying for the most part. The problem that is not so easily corrected is the "cyan drift" that appears in shots (DNG and JPEG) when using the recommended UV/IR filter on a lens. Creating these corrected profiles for use in post-processing has not been proven to be easy or always effective, and sometimes requires several third party software tools. Leica has started down the path for these corrections to be done in-camera, for their supported and filtered lenses. The selection criteria on the user side need not be the 1000 items. Having all those options could be great, but it could also be more than cumbersome and confusing to use. Most other corrections (vignetting, distortion, etc.) can more easily be corrected with "camera/lens profiles" in tools like PS, but the "cyan drift" issue is a lot tougher to manage that way. No PS, C1 or other tools have those sorts of correction capabilites right now.

 

I think it would be both fantastic and very possible for Leica to give that UV/IR color correction adjustment to all with a menu and in-camera processing. That way, you could use your 15mm f2.8 Distagon with a Leica UV/IR filter and get shots that would be cyan corrected at least to the level of the WATE at a 16mm setting. Will it be perfect? Maybe not, but I will bet that it will not only be very close, but far more usable than no filter, or trying to do it in post. That is greate for Leica, even if they do not make a 15mm f2.8 lens.....you are still taking the shot on an M8!!!

 

LJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Leica itself has not suggested that anything that they have done was with the intention of closing the system. The company was nearly driven to extinction as it became more a producer of objects for collectors and status accessories for the exclusive luxury market. That road allready led the company to insolvency. Thank god, the Hermes mentality is out the door and the new management seems determined to remake Leica into a company that once again makes tools for photographers. I think they understand that the entry into the RF market by VC and Zeiss was a big net plus for Leica as it expanded the market and brought in a new younger generation of users that could replenish the aging ranks of Leica's customer base. This has given them a much bigger and potentially more lucrative playing field.

 

As far as the usefullness of user feedback -it was users who quickly discovered all the problems that went unnoticed in the companies internal testing. Of course along with useful feedback will come suggestions that are nonsensical and impractical. Leica's management will make decisions that it deems are in the companies, shareholders and customers best interest. They will, as do all effective managers, pay close attention to users experience and feedback. To provide constructive feedback on how to deal with a defect (or if you prefer a technical limitation) in the product which Leica is working hard to provide working solutions for is the purpose of this petition.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Only to clarify some points. Because I also am aware that in this moment, when diametric points of view are so distant, it’s useless going on with the debate. This is my last contribution in it.

 

1- I’ve forgotten three words: “in this post” (or if you want “in this Forum”).

2- Even less Leica has suggested was going to open its technology to the concurrence.

3- If the performances of the Leica lenses are matched by the concurrence with a price ten times less all of you are right and Leica is lost; if not, what about Leica lenses production? Produce only for the rich people, as you say.

4- I’ve specifically said that I believe in users feedback in all senses, but you must difference between a feedback and a crowded multitude of X,Y,Z lenses owners singing their excellences and asking why Leica lenses are so expensive and why Leica co doesn’t make easy to use the other makes in place of the original ones.

5- Leica must do what now is doing: sell to other companies their beautiful lenses (or licenses). This is a business strength to hold and develop the company, not some odd interested policies.

6- And a last question: Why the priced and expensive M8 camera is for everybody and the priced and expensive Leica lenses are only for collectors?

 

Bye all,

 

Francisco.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3- If the performances of the Leica lenses are matched by the concurrence with a price ten times less all of you are right and Leica is lost; if not, what about Leica lenses production? Produce only for the rich people, as you say.

Francisco.

 

Francisco,

Not to belabor your very good points, or keep this discussion/debate raging on......

 

The point you make about lenses is true, but I think there is something missing. I am a pro photographer and am now supporting my complete Canon 1-series system plus my newer Leica M8 system. When I first got back to Leica after many year away from the M4 and my photojournalism days, I was not sure it would work for my needs, so I purchased the M8 body, and several very good, but less expensive lenses (Zeiss 25/2.8 Biogon, CV 15/4.5, CV 35/1.2 Nokton, and CV 50/1.5 Nokton). All are very good lenses and deliver very nice images for me. However, since the issue with IR, filters and such is now making a significant difference for image capture, I have been trying to code several of my non-Leica lenses. I have successfull done the CV15/4.5 and the CV 35/1.2 Nokton. I am going to work on the Zeiss 25/2.8 this week after I receive a new mount ring from Zeiss. That has not stopped me from acquiring a Leica 50/1.0 Noctilux nor the 75/2.0 AA, both coded by Leica. Even with the working CV 15, I am still considering the WATE lens. Why? Well, there is convenience of use, excellent optics for imaging, and system compatibility. Does that mean the others are not as good? Not at all. The only reason I am seriously thinking about more Leica lenses, is because using the M8, with the less expensive but still vey good lenses, has increased my appreciation for the entire camera and the images it helps me capture. I love the files enough to be trying to figure out how to use the Leica more in my pro work, and even to consider a second body or more. I may not have jumped into Leica again at all, had I not been able to use some very fine third party lenses to quickly fill my kit for what I needed. That is partly why, for me, that it is seen much to Leica's advantage to provide their UV/IR correction technology to work on all lenses. The more you use this camera, the more you realize how wonderful the images are, and getting more folks into the entire Leica system is important to Leica. I think they will have greater success by opening up key parts of the system to make it easier for many more to participate. There are a lot of folks with uncoded and uncode-able lenses that are sittiing on the sidelines right now, and are not going to spend money for filters and coding or new lenses if they cannot see a path to entry that will not cost them the price of buying a whole new system....again.

 

Just my thoughts on this. I respect that others have different views and perspectives, but I use my gear professionally, and for me it is not about "brand loyalty" but performance and image quality. If I can use some lenses that Leica does not make, such as the CV 35/1.2 Nokton, or the Zeiss 15/2.8, that is great for Leica, as I am still using them on a Leica M8 camera, and I am more likely to add more lenses to my kit the more I use that camera. Simple, but real economics for them.

 

LJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

6- And a last question: Why the priced and expensive M8 camera is for everybody and the priced and expensive Leica lenses are only for collectors?

I was referring to the various gold plated, lizard skined limited edition Leica's, not the lens line. CV did more to keep Leica alive by bringing a new generation of M users into the market, many of whom eventually bought Leica gear, then all the exclusive limited edtion Leica's ever did.

 

A market with multiple choices for the consumer, multiple vendors, multiple price points and open standards is a healthy environment for manufacturer and customer. Those young students who buy VC or used Leica's today are Leica's future customers as they move up the income scale later in life. Many photographers will buy one or two Leica lenses and fill out their kit with a VC or a Zeiss -or the M8 might be out of reach with new Leica lenses. If they didn't have the option of the used market and lower priced vendors they might not buy into Leica M at all because they couldn't afford a complete outfit. A closed system (which I don't think is Leica's intention) would mean less sales for Leica not more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While Leica has copyrighted the coding of the M-mount, they do not have any rights regarding milling of screw-mount adapters that are not coded.

 

If we wish to pay to have adapters milled, and then paint codes on them ourselves, no commercial transaction has occurred that violates the copyright. We can paint (read: deface) our own property at our own wish.

 

On the other hand, it's surely cheaper and safer to have M-mount lenses coded by Leica, rather than try to code the M-mount some other way.

 

As I am loath to part with my few lenses that I need for photog, I think my tactic will be to acquire a new wide, then send my lenses in, singly, for coding, beginning with the one closest to the new wide, and continuing in that direction.

 

Again, Leica is *fully* aware of the desire for a menu item to identify lenses. It's pretty clear that there is no response so far.

 

As my dad would say, quoting his father, "Don't get your bowels in an uproar." As I would say, "Don't worry about anything you can't change."

 

Good luck with the petition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest tummydoc
Most other corrections (vignetting, distortion, etc.) can more easily be corrected with "camera/lens profiles" in tools like PS, but the "cyan drift" issue is a lot tougher to manage that way. No PS, C1 or other tools have those sorts of correction capabilites right now.

 

If you're on a PC, the free Panotools plug-in works perfectly and easily to correct the cyan drift. The firmware correction in the M8 has one setting for each lens, however the amount of cyan drift can vary depending on the light. A couple of us have already seen that. Even if the firmware does a great job most of the time the plug-in or one like it is still going to be needed at this point.

 

That said, Leica's excuse for not giving us a menu-selectable lens detection is insulting. I don't hear people with their Nikon D200s screaming about accidentally setting the wrong lens, and there are a lot more noobs using those than an M8. We're used to thinking while shooting, that's the zen of Leica M is it not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Vinay,

I work on Mac, so Panotools does not apply. There is a Mac-comptible version (PTTools or something) that can also be used. That may be an acceptable solution for work on a few images, but if one is shooting a lot, all of those extra processing trips and adjustments is both a time killer and a pain, even with batch processing. Also, I think the Mac version only works on JPEGs, not on DNG images. So, back to my point about having to use several different tools that may or may not get the job done efficiently and effectively for most needs.

 

The best solution is stil to get the most corrections done at time of capture, if possible. I also use Aperture on my Mac, and keep all the files as DNG with simple versions of my corrections. None of that is destructive, so having a cleaner, corrected file to start with is not only preferred, but actaully is an easier way to work for me, and for many others I would suspect.

 

Again, not trying to create an ugly debate, but more to see differing perspectives. There are post-processing solutions, but they are not simple for everyone, and really should not be needed as a further cost/hassle for the corrections Leica has "imposed" with the need of the UV/IR filter for proper color work. They put out a great camera with a very limited IR filtering capability that created a lot of magenta issues. They addressed this with the recommendation of using a special filter, most of which has been additional purchases by users. They now offer an in-camera color correction option to help the new filter cyan cast issue. So the next "solution" should be I buy a PC and use third party software to process files as the only way to "fix" issues they have created? Do not think so. Leica has the in-camera solutions that would be more than acceptable for the range of lenses for which it is most needed. Providing that in a menu system for users seems like both a simple and correct thing to do, but also will make their entire system more accessible and usable to a much larger and interested group of users. One does not penalize the buyer for the seller error.

 

LJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...